The lack of evolution of weed resistance to the herbicide glyphosate has been considered from several perspectives. Few plant species are inherently resistant to glyphosate. Furthermore, the long history of extensive use of the herbicide has resulted in no verified instances of weeds evolving resistance under field situations. Unique properties of glyphosate such as its mode of action, metabolism, chemical structure and lack of residual activity in soil may explain this observation. Selection for glyphosate resistance of crops using intense whole plant and cell/tissue culture techniques, including mutagenesis, has had only limited success and is unlikely to be duplicated under normal field conditions. Information obtained in the development of glyphosate-resistant crops suggests that target-site alterations that decrease the herbicidal activity of glyphosate also may lead to reduced survival of a weed. In addition, the complex manipulations that were required for the development of glyphosate-resistant crops are unlikely to be duplicated in nature to evolve glyphosate-resistant weeds.

Field experiments were conducted at Ashland Bottoms in northeastern Kansas and at Hays in western Kansas in 2001, 2002, and 2003 to determine the response of soil microbial and nematode communities to different herbicides and tillage practices under a glyphosate-resistant cropping system. Conventional herbicide treatments were a tank mixture of cloransulam plus S-metolachlor plus sulfentrazone for soybean and a commercially available mixture of acetochlor and atrazine for corn. Glyphosate was applied at 1.12 kg ai ha−1 when weeds were 10 or 20 cm tall in both corn and soybean. Soil samples were collected monthly at Ashland Bottoms during the growing period for soil microbial biomass (SMB) carbon determination. In addition, substrate-induced respiration (SIR) and BIOLOG substrate utilization were determined at the end of the growing season each year at Ashland Bottoms, and nematode populations were determined at the beginning and the end of the growing season at both sites. Direct effects of glyphosate rates on soil microbial and nematode communities were also studied in a controlled environment. Values for SMB carbon, SIR, and BIOLOG substrate utilization were not altered by glyphosate. Nematode community response to the glyphosate treatment was similar under both conventional tillage and no-till environments. Total nematode densities were similar with the glyphosate and conventional herbicide treatments. SMB carbon and BIOLOG substrate utilization did not differ between tillage treatments. Nematode densities were greater under conventional tillage than in the no-till system. This study showed that soil health when glyphosate was applied in a glyphosate-resistant cropping system was similar to that of cropping systems that used conventional herbicides.

Previous greenhouse studies with a noncommercial glyphosate-resistant sugarbeet variety indicated that susceptibility to Rhizoctonia crown and root rot could increase after glyphosate was applied. Greenhouse and field experiments were conducted in 2008 and 2009 to determine if glyphosate influenced disease severity in potential commercially available varieties of glyphosate-resistant sugarbeet. In the first greenhouse experiment in 2008, Hilleshög 9027RR, the most tolerant variety to Rhizoctonia crown and root rot, exhibited an increase in disease severity when glyphosate was applied. There were no significant differences between herbicide treatments in Hilleshög 9028RR, and glyphosate decreased disease severity in Hilleshög 9032RR when compared with the no-herbicide treatment. Experiments conducted to determine if glyphosate influenced Rhizoctonia solani growth in vitro indicated that glyphosate did not increase the radial growth of R. solani, except at 10× (190 µg ae ml−1) the normal rate of glyphosate plus ammonium sulfate (AMS). Field and additional greenhouse experiments were conducted using four commercial varieties. Differences in disease severity were observed when comparing varieties, but glyphosate did not significantly influence the severity of Rhizoctonia crown and root rot when compared with the no-herbicide control. Choosing a glyphosate-resistant sugarbeet variety with the best demonstrated tolerance to Rhizoctonia crown and root rot is an important factor in reducing disease severity and maintaining sugarbeet yield.

In 2010, a grower survey was administered to 1,299 growers in 22 states to determine changes in weed management in the United States from 2006 to 2009. The majority of growers had not changed weed management practices in the previous 3 yr; however, 75% reported using weed management practices targeted at glyphosate-resistant (GR) weeds. Growers were asked to rate their efforts at controlling GR weeds and rate the effectiveness of various practices for controlling/preventing GR weeds regardless of whether they were personally using them. Using the herbicide labeled rate, scouting fields, and rotating crops were among the practices considered by growers as most effective in managing GR weeds. Sixty-seven percent of growers reported effective management of GR weeds. Between the 2005 and 2010 Benchmark surveys, the frequency of growers using specific actions to manage GR weeds increased markedly. Although the relative effectiveness of practices, as perceived by growers, remained the same, the effectiveness rating of tillage and the use of residual and POST herbicides increased.

Corn and soybean growers in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Mississippi, Nebraska, and North Carolina, as well as cotton growers in Mississippi and North Carolina, were surveyed about their views on changes in problematic weeds and weed pressure in cropping systems based on a glyphosate-resistant (GR) crop. No growers using a GR cropping system for more than 5 yr reported heavy weed pressure. Over all cropping systems investigated (continuous GR soybean, continuous GR cotton, GR corn/GR soybean, GR soybean/non-GR crop, and GR corn/non-GR crop), 0 to 7% of survey respondents reported greater weed pressure after implementing rotations using GR crops, whereas 31 to 57% felt weed pressure was similar and 36 to 70% indicated that weed pressure was less. Pigweed, morningglory, johnsongrass, ragweed, foxtail, and velvetleaf were mentioned as their most problematic weeds, depending on the state and cropping system. Systems using GR crops improved weed management compared with the technologies used before the adoption of GR crops. However, the long-term success of managing problematic weeds in GR cropping systems will require the development of multifaceted integrated weed management programs that include glyphosate as well as other weed management tactics.

Field experiments were conducted at three locations in 2003 and 2004 to examine clethodim and quizalofop-P efficacy on spring wheat seedlings when applied alone or in tank mixtures with herbicides used to control broadleaf weeds. Clethodim at the recommended rate of 30 g/ha reduced spring wheat biomass by 63 to 98% and was only >90% in three of six site years. In contrast, quizalofop-P at the recommended rate of 36 g/ha reduced wheat biomass >90% in all cases. Clethodim or quizalofop-P could be tank mixed with 2,4-D ester, bromoxynil, or bromoxynil plus MCPA ester with little risk of reduced efficacy on wheat. However, 2,4-D amine was highly antagonistic to both herbicides. The commercial mixture of thifensulfuron plus tribenuron reduced clethodim, but not quizalofop-P, efficacy on wheat. Herbicide options exist for simultaneous control of volunteer glyphosate-resistant canola and glyphosate-resistant wheat if the latter technology were to be commercialized in the future.

Over 175 growers in each of six states (Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Mississippi, Nebraska, and North Carolina) were surveyed by telephone to assess their perceptions of the benefits of utilizing the glyphosate-resistant (GR) crop trait in corn, cotton, and soybean. The survey was also used to determine the weed management challenges growers were facing after using this trait for a minimum of 4 yr. This survey allowed the development of baseline information on how weed management and crop production practices have changed since the introduction of the trait. It provided useful information on common weed management issues that should be addressed through applied research and extension efforts. The survey also allowed an assessment of the perceived levels of concern among growers about glyphosate resistance in weeds and whether they believed they had experienced glyphosate resistance on their farms. Across the six states surveyed, producers reported 38, 97, and 96% of their corn, cotton, and soybean hectarage planted in a GR cultivar. The most widely adopted GR cropping system was a GR soybean/non-GR crop rotation system; second most common was a GR soybean/GR corn crop rotation system. The non-GR crop component varied widely, with the most common crops being non-GR corn or rice. A large range in farm size for the respondents was observed, with North Carolina having the smallest farms in all three crops. A large majority of corn and soybean growers reported using some type of crop rotation system, whereas very few cotton growers rotated out of cotton. Overall, rotations were much more common in Midwestern states than in Southern states. This is important information as weed scientists assist growers in developing and using best management practices to minimize the development of glyphosate resistance.

Reducing seeding rates in 19- or 76-cm row soybean below the optimum rate may reduce soybean competitiveness with weeds, and indirectly increase production costs to the grower. Field studies in 2001 and 2002 evaluated the effect of soybean seeding rate and row spacing on the emergence, growth, and competitiveness of eastern black nightshade (EBN) in soybean. EBN emergence ceased within 45 d after planting (DAP), and was similar across soybean seeding rates and row spacing. EBN control by glyphosate was not affected by soybean population or row spacing. Soybean planted in 19-cm rows was more competitive with EBN, regardless of seeding rate. Increasing the soybean seeding rate in 76-cm rows from 185,000 seeds/ha to 432,000 seeds/ha reduced EBN dry weight threefold at East Lansing and nearly twofold at Clarksville in 2002. There was no increase in EBN density or dry weight in 19-cm row soybean planted at 308,000 seeds/ha compared with 556,000 seeds/ha, whereas a seeding rate of 432,000 seeds/ha in 76-cm row soybean did not suppress EBN dry weight or increase soybean yield in the presence of EBN compared with a seeding rate of 308,000 seeds/ha.

Almost 1,650 corn, cotton, and soybean growers in 22 states participated in a 2010 telephone survey to determine their attitudes with regard to which weed species were most problematic in glyphosate-resistant (GR) crop production systems for corn, cotton, and soybean. The survey is a follow-up to a previous 2005 to 2006 survey that utilized a smaller set of growers from fewer states. In general, growers continued to estimate weed populations as low and few challenges have been created following adoption of GR cropping systems. Pigweed and foxtail species were dominant overall, whereas other species were more commodity and state specific. Corn, cotton, and soybean growers cited velvetleaf, annual morningglory, and waterhemp, respectively, as predominant weeds. Growers in the South region were more likely to report pigweed and waterhemp (Amaranthus spp.), whereas growers in the East and West reported horseweed. When growers were asked with which GR weeds they had experienced personally, horseweed was reported in all regions, but growers in the South more frequently reported pigweed, whereas growers in the East and West regions more frequently reported waterhemp. Comparisons with the previous 2005 survey indicated that more growers believed they were experiencing GR weeds and were more aware of specific examples in their state. In particular, the Amaranthus complex was of greatest concern in continuously cropped soybean and cotton.

Field trials were conducted from 2006 through 2008 to determine the influence of ethofumesate applied at planting followed by dimethenamid-p or s-metolachlor applied to emerged sugarbeet for late-season weed control in glyphosate-resistant sugarbeet. The entire plot area was kept weed-free until mid-June by applying glyphosate at the four- and eight-true-leaf sugarbeet growth stages. Glyphosate was not applied from mid-June until late-July to allow weed growth as a measure of the residual benefit from ethofumesate, dimethenamid-p, and s-metolachlor applied earlier in the growing season. Dimethenamid-p was not as effective as s-metolachlor in reducing weed density in mid-July. Late-season weed suppression from both s-metolachlor and dimethenamid-p benefitted from ethofumesate applied at planting. Dimethenamid-p applied when sugarbeet reached the six-true-leaf growth stage reduced weed density and sugarbeet injury more than earlier applications. The lowest weed density in mid-July was achieved when s-metolachlor was applied at the six- to eight-true-leaf sugarbeet growth stage compared to earlier growth stages. A planting time application of ethofumesate followed by two glyphosate applications plus s-metolachlor at the eight-true-leaf sugarbeet growth stage provided 89% more weed control in mid-July than glyphosate alone. Suppressing late-season weed development increased sugarbeet root yield 15% compared with areas not receiving ethofumesate and s-metolachlor.

A 2010 survey of 1,299 corn, cotton, and soybean growers was conducted to determine their attitudes and awareness regarding glyphosate-resistant (GR) weeds and resultant implications on weed management practices. An additional 350 growers included in the current study participated in a 2005 survey, and these answers were compared across time so that cross-sectional and longitudinal comparisons of responses could be made. Most growers surveyed in 2010 were aware of the potential for weeds to evolve resistance to glyphosate; however, many growers were not aware of glyphosate resistance in specific weeds in their county or state. Growers in the South were different from growers in other geographic regions and were significantly more aware of local cases of GR weeds. Awareness of GR weeds did not increase appreciably from 2005 to 2010, but the percentage who reported GR weeds as problematic was significantly higher. Grower reports of GR weeds on-farm in 2010 were up considerably from 2005, with growers in the South reporting significantly more instances than growers in other regions. Growers in the South were also more likely to consider glyphosate resistance a serious problem. Overall, 30% of growers did not consider GR weeds to be a problem. It appears that most growers received information about glyphosate resistance from farm publications, although in the South this percentage was less than for other geographic regions. Growers in the South received more information from universities and extension sources.

A survey of farmers from six U.S. states (Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, Mississippi, and North Carolina) was conducted to assess the farmers' views on glyphosate-resistant (GR) weeds and tactics used to prevent or manage GR weed populations in genetically engineered (GE) GR crops. Only 30% of farmers thought GR weeds were a serious issue. Few farmers thought field tillage and/or using a non-GR crop in rotation with GR crops would be an effective strategy. Most farmers did not recognize the role that the recurrent use of an herbicide plays in evolution of resistance. A substantial number of farmers underestimated the potential for GR weed populations to evolve in an agroecosystem dominated by glyphosate as the weed control tactic. These results indicate there are major challenges that the agriculture and weed science communities must face to implement long-term sustainable GE GR-based cropping systems within the agroecosystem.

Approximately 1,300 growers from 22 states were surveyed during 2010 to determine herbicide use. Cropping systems included continuous glyphosate-resistant corn, cotton, and soybean, and various combinations of these crops and rotations with non–glyphosate-resistant crops. The most commonly used herbicide for both fall and spring applications was glyphosate followed by synthetic auxin herbicides. Herbicide application in spring was favored over application in the fall. The percentage of growers in a glyphosate-only system was as high as 69% for some cropping systems. Excluding glyphosate, the most frequently used herbicides included photosystem II, mitotic, and protoporphyrinogen oxidase inhibitors. A higher percentage of growers integrated herbicides other than glyphosate during 2010 compared with 2005. Extensive educational efforts have promoted resistance management by increasing the diversity of herbicides in glyphosate-resistant cropping systems. However, a considerable percentage of growers continued use of only glyphosate from the period of 2005 to 2010, and this practice most likely will continue to exert a high level of selection for evolved glyphosate-resistant weed species.